[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YYMGyx8Kpq/Nx4WL@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 22:01:47 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mremap_pages: Save a few cycles in 'get_dev_pagemap()'
On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 10:54:09PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 03/11/2021 à 22:41, Matthew Wilcox a écrit :
> > On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 10:35:34PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > > Use 'percpu_ref_tryget_live_rcu()' instead of 'percpu_ref_tryget_live()' to
> > > save a few cycles when it is known that the rcu lock is already
> > > taken/released.
> >
> > If this is really important, we can add an __xa_load() which doesn't
> > take the RCU read lock.
>
> There are a few:
> rcu_read_lock();
> mem = xa_load(...);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> patterns here and there.
If that's all they are, then the rcu_read_lock() and unlock can be
deleted.
if they're actually
rcu_read_lock()
mem = xa_load(...);
try_get_ref(mem);
rcu_read_unlock();
then of course they can't be.
> I don't have any numbers of if saving some rcu_read_lock/rcu_read_unlock
> would be useful in these cases.
>
> The only numbers I have are in [1].
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/cover.1634822969.git.asml.silence@gmail.com/
It may not be worth hyperoptimising the slow path like this patch ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists